Actually this latest ad hominem is another example of a double standard or blindness, for it was you who sarcastically called me "genius" ("Well genius, you might want to let authors in the OT...know about that"), inferring mental deficiency on my part, and my substantiated reasoned response an "attempt to further muddy the waters, that, and your need to spout off." So much for self-righteous "Christian" fruit.
“…the word apocrypha as it is a word that is greatly misunderstood. It comes from Greek and is formed from the combination of apo (away) and krytein (hide or conceal). Thus, it signifies that which is ‘hidden away’ or ‘concealed’. Apocryphan is the singular form and apocrypha the plural..., the word apocrypha ORIGINALLY MEANT A TEXT TOO SACRED AND SECRET TO BE IN EVERYONES HANDS.
Your already marginal credibility continues to degrade. You first invoke a feminist (likely Mormonic) whose interest is in finding women of God - whom she seems to think is plural - and by skullduggery asserts that God meant for women to be "equal partner to her husband, corresponding to him in every way," even to be his savior.
Seeking female heroes, she finds women from Pseudepigrapha - falsely-attributed works - and apocryphal works, and thus she tries to elevate such works as being TOO SACRED AND SECRET TO BE IN EVERYONES HANDS based on the "original meaning of apocrypha, " which etymologically is from Greek apokryphos "hidden; obscure, hard to understand...from apo "off, away" (see apo-) + kryptein "to hide" (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Apocrypha)
However, "cute" used to mean bow-legged; "bully" originally meant darling or sweetheart; "Nice" originally meant stupid or foolish; "counterfeit" used to mean a legitimate copy, and the way this word apocrypha was used is the issue. And rather than meaning that the apocrypha were considered too sacred and secret to be in everyone's hands, Jerome described the extra 7 Old Testament books as apocrypha, and it was not because they were secret, but were actually part of later versions of the Greek LXX, which likely existed by the 2nd century.
Thus your conspiratorial "TOO SECRET TO BE IN EVERYONES HANDS" is simply inaccurate.
You can find more information about apocryphal books here: https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/09/30/marriage-of-mary-to-joseph-the-carpenter/
So now you send me to a Muslim site, " dedicated to providing constructive responses and refutations against Islamophobes" as a credible source? "Asalam o Alikum Brother, you are doing a very noble and good job mashALLAH."
Which is where you get your error that "Joseph [was] 90 years old when married" among other fables? This is the same Muslims who (faced with their leader taking a 9-year-iold bride) assert that Dinah (who left home to visit the daughters of the land) in Gn. 34 at the time of her marriage was no older than 7-years-old (based on the LIE that the word for "damsel" in Genesis 34:3 must mean "child” and “infant” here, contrary to its use . And that Rebecca was between the ages of 3-10, when she was married off to 40-year-old Isaac. How far in the bottom of the rubbish barrel do you have to resort to?
Make sure you review the information concerning the book of Hebrews, or research it online, you might find it interesting.
You mean another late (6th or early 7th century) wannabe from Egypt?
The more you argue the more you are an argument against yourself.
Well, there was this Catholic site I thought about sending you to, but you seem to hate Catholics more than Muslims.